Node settings (width,color,etc) could default to "unspecified", preserving
present behavior as well as allowing a beginning and an end node to
determine the interpolation of widths across a range of nodes. At least two
approaches to this. The less visually desirable but simpler scheme,
weighting an intermediate node's effective width based on its index (for
want of a better term). E.g. four nodes, {A,B,C,D}, with widths specified
at A,D and unspecified at B,C. B = 2/3*A +1/3*B. The more visually
appealing but (perhaps?) more complicated scheme, weighting based upon
distance traveled along the arc.
Originator: YES
Node settings (width,color,etc) could default to "unspecified", preserving
present behavior as well as allowing a beginning and an end node to
determine the interpolation of widths across a range of nodes. At least two
approaches to this. The less visually desirable but simpler scheme,
weighting an intermediate node's effective width based on its index (for
want of a better term). E.g. four nodes, {A,B,C,D}, with widths specified
at A,D and unspecified at B,C. B = 2/3*A +1/3*B. The more visually
appealing but (perhaps?) more complicated scheme, weighting based upon
distance traveled along the arc.